Interdental cleaning is fundamental for maintaining oral health by removing plaque and food debris from between the teeth and along the gum line. This prevents the accumulation of sticky biofilm, which leads to gingivitis and tooth decay. The choice often involves comparing the mechanical friction of traditional string floss versus the hydrodynamic power of the water pick. Understanding the distinct mechanisms and clinical results of each method helps determine the best tool for comprehensive care.
The Role of Traditional Flossing
Traditional string floss, made of nylon or PTFE, works by physically scraping the surfaces of the teeth. Users must curve the floss into a “C” shape against the tooth and slide it up and down to dislodge plaque biofilm. This friction is highly effective at disrupting sticky bacterial colonies, especially at the contact point between teeth.
The manual process requires dexterity to ensure the floss wraps fully around each tooth surface and reaches just below the gum line. String floss typically only reaches about three millimeters into the gingival sulcus, limiting its effectiveness in areas with deeper pockets or complex tooth anatomy.
How Water Picks Work
An oral irrigator, commonly known as a water pick, uses a pulsating stream of pressurized water. This device employs hydrodynamic force, a combination of pressure and rapid pulsation, to create a flushing action in the interdental space. The water jet works by rinsing to dislodge loose food particles and non-adherent bacteria.
The rapid pulsation creates compression and decompression phases that effectively flush debris from hard-to-reach areas. Unlike string floss, a water pick can penetrate deeper into the periodontal pocket, often reaching depths of up to six to seven millimeters. This deep-cleaning capability is useful for removing bacteria and inflammatory byproducts from below the gum line.
Clinical Effectiveness Comparison
Clinical research suggests the water pick holds an advantage in improving overall gum health. Multiple trials show that adding a water flosser to a brushing routine is significantly more effective than string floss for reducing gingivitis and bleeding. For instance, data indicates a water pick can be up to 52% more effective at reducing gingivitis and 93% better at reducing gum bleeding.
This superiority in gum health markers stems from the water pick’s ability to flush bacteria and inflammatory agents from periodontal pockets. While plaque removal results are more varied, many studies show water flossers are at least as effective as string floss. However, traditional floss remains the gold standard for the mechanical removal of tightly-adherent plaque from the specific contact point between teeth.
When to Use Both Tools
Dental professionals often recommend the water pick as a beneficial alternative or supplement, especially for specific patient populations.
Orthodontics and Complex Dental Work
Individuals with orthodontic devices, such as braces, find the water stream indispensable for cleaning around wires and brackets, which are difficult to navigate with string floss. Patients with complex dental work, including bridges, crowns, and implants, also benefit from the water pick’s ability to clean around the margins of restorations.
Dexterity and Compliance
For individuals with limited mobility or poor dexterity, the water pick offers an easier option that promotes better compliance with daily cleaning.
Complementary Use
The prevailing professional recommendation for the average user is to use the two tools complementarily. Flossing first mechanically disrupts and loosens the toughest plaque. This is followed by the water pick, which powerfully flushes away the dislodged debris and cleans deep into the gum pockets.